CA1122902A - Non-soap detergent with a deodorant - Google Patents

Abstract

- 1 - cC.1020 E

ABSTRACT:

A deodorant detergent product comprises a non-soap detergent active compound, and a deodorant composition.
The product can be used for personal washing of the skin and will as a result reduce human body malodour. The product can also be employed for washing fabrics which when subsequently worn in contact with the skin aid in the reduction of human body malodour.

Description

ll~Z902 C.1020 US

This invention rela-tes to deodorant de-tergent products for use in suppressing Iruman bo~y malodour.
Bacl~round to the Invention It has long been recognisecl -that the development o-~ body malodour is largely due to bacterial action on the products of the sweat glands. Washing the skin with a detergent~ for instance in the form of a personal washing detergent bar, removes malodorous products and reduces the concentration of bacteria on -the skin. Likewise, washi~g soiled clo-thing with a fabric washing detergent product, ~or instance in the ~orm of a powder or liquid detergent produc-t, removes malodorous products and bacteria derived from the skin.
It has been customary to incorporate germicides into detergent products, particularly those designed for 1~ personal washing, in the belief tha-t gro~th of those skin micro~lora that contribute to body malodour can be inhibited and the production o~ malodorou~ substances ~uppressed.
Germicides are at least par-tly e~ective in reducing or retarding the development of body malodour, but they do not completely solve the problem, possibly because there are other causes o~ malodour development on the skin which are unrelated to the proli~eration o~ bacteria.
Summary of the Invention It has now been discovered tha-t cer-tain comb:inations o~
~aterials other than germicides, hereina-~ter referred to as "deodorant compositions", ~hen incorporated into de-tergent products ~or personal washing provide a more e~fective means

2 ~

,

- 3 - C.1020 EP

for inhibiting malodour development on the skin than the use of the conventional germicides. Likewise, it has also been discovered that deodorant compositions, when incorporated into a fabric washing detergent product, can be deposited onto the fabric of a garment washed with the product, so that the fabric of the garment then has the property of reducing body malodour when the garment is subsequently worn in contact with the skin.

In the course of attempts to characterise this new principle, many hundreds of materials have been screened.

Definition of the Invention In its widest aspect, the invention provides a deodorant detergent product comprising from 0.5 to 99.99%
by weight of a non-soap detergent active compound, and from 0.01 to 10% by weight of a deodorant composition having a Deodorant Value of from 0.50 to 3.5 as measured by the Deodorant Value Test, the deodorant composition comprising from 45 to 100% by weight of deodorant components, said components having a lipoxidase-inhibiting capacity of at least S0% or a Raoult Variance Ratio of at least 1.1, said components being classified into six classes consisting of:

Class 1 : phenolic substances Class 2 : essential oils, extracts, resins and synthetic oils Class 3 : aldehydes and ketones Class ~ : polycyclic compounds Class 5 : esters Class 6 : alcohols, ' ;~
.

~lZZ~OZ

- 4 - C.1020 EP

provided that where a component can be classified into more than one class it is placed in the lower or lowest numbered class; said components being selected so that:

(a) the deodorant composition contains at least five components of which at least one must be selected from each of class 1, class 2 and class 4;

(b) the deodorant composition contains components from at least 4 of the 6 classes; and (c) any component present in the deodorant composition at a concentration of less than 0.5%
by weight of said composition is eliminated from the requirements of (a) and (b).

The invention also provides a process for preparing a deodorant detergent product which process comprises blending a non-soap detergent active compound and a deodorant composition as herein defined to provide a deodorant detergent product.

The invention furthermore provides a method`for suppressing human body malodour which comprises contacting the skin with a fabric treated with a deodorant detergent product as herein defined.
B

l~Z~OZ C.1020 US

It is a pre:Eerred property of the deodoran-t detergent produc-t of the invention that it should comprise a deodorant composition which satisfies a deodorancy test when applied to the skin of human subjects. The avera~e amount by which body malodour should be reduced is e~pressed in terms of the deodorant value o~ the deodorant composition contained in the detergent product. Products o~ the invention accordingly preferably comprise a deodorant composition having a deodorant value of from 0.50 to 3.5. Products in which the deodorant composition has a deodorant value of below 0.50 are outside the scope of this invention and are considered to be incapable of reducing body malodour to a significant extent.
The Deodorant_Value_~est In this test the deodorant value of a deodorant composition is measured by assessing its effectiveness, when contained in a standard soap bar at a s-tandard conccntration, in reducing body malodour when the standard soap bar is used to wash -the axillae (armpits) of a panel of human subjects.
The choice of a soap base is not critical to the per~ormance of the test but as illustra-tive o~ the conduct of the test in this respect the procedure followed in -the preparation of the base emplored in many of the tests referred to later in this specification is included in the descrip-tion of the tes-t.
Standard soap bars are prepared as follows; all amounts given being by ~eight.

- 5 - /

llZZ~OZ C.1020 U~

As soap base there is used a neu-tral we-t sodium soap containin~ 63% of total fatty mat-ter of which 82% is tallow fatty acid and 18% is cocOIIut oil fat-ty acid. To a homogeneous mix-ture of 9000 par-ts o* this soap ~ase and 3~0 parts oI free coconut oil fatty acid at 80C are added with mixing, 9.4 parts of a 20% aqueous solution of tetraso~ium ethylenediamine tetraaceta-te, 2.2 parts of a 60% aqueous solution of l-hydroxy-ethane-l,l-diphosphonic acid and 7.2 parts of butylated hydroxy toluene (BHT) antioxidant dissolved in a little 1~ methylated spirits and the temperature of -the mass is raised to 1~0C under supera-tmospheric pressure. The mass is then sprayed at about 30 mm of mercury, to produce a dried soap composition which is collected and extruded at 30C as noodles of about 12% moisture content.
9)770 parts of the soap noodles thus obtained are mixed a-t ambient temperature with 150 parts of the deodorant composition to be tested, together with 30 parts of a ti-tanium dioxide opacifier and 50 parts of a colourant suspension. The resulting mixture is milled and plodded in conventional equip~ent, cut into billets and stamped into bars. The deodorant composition -to be tested is therefore present at the standard level of 1. 5%. These bars are described as 80/20/S
soap base and consist of 80 parts tallo~ soap and 20 parts coconut soap, 5 parts of this soap ~:ix-ture being free fatty acids expressed a~ coconut oil fatty acid.

- 6 - /...

.

~ .

9(~Z

- 7 - C.1020 EP

Control soap bars are prepared in a similar manner except-that the deodorant composition is omitted. In other respects, the control bar should only contain those additives conventionally present in personal washing products and for the purpose in the amount conventionally used in the art. For example, it is permissible as indicated in the foregoing description to include anti-oxidants in the control bar, but these should be present only in the amount required to stabilise the soap base.

The test is conducted in a manner based on that devised by Whitehouse & Carter as published in "The Proceedings of the Scientific Section of the Toilet Goods Association", No 18, December 1967, at pages 31 to 37, under the title "Evaluation of Deodorant Toilet Bars".

The test described in that publication was modified in three ways: firstly, the standard soap bar containing 1.5~ by weight of a deodorant composition instead of germicides was employed, secondly. a 0 to 5 instead of a 0 to 10 grading scale was employed as a basis for determining the deodorant value, and thirdly, grading of odour intensity was performed 5 hours instead of 24 hcurs after treatment. This test is referred to herein as the Deodorant Value test.

The test is conducted as follows:

~ team of 3 Caucasian female assessors of age within the range of from 20 to 40 years is selected for olfactory evaluation on the basis that each is able to rank correctly the odour levels of the series of aqueous isovaleric acid solutions listed in Table I below, and each is able to detect the reduction in body odour following application to the axillae of human subjects of soap containing 2~

z9~z - 7a - C.1020 EP

germicides, according to the procedure described in the Whitehouse and Carter paper.

A panel of 50 human subjects for use in the test is assembled from Caucasian male subjects of age within the range of from 20 to 55 years. By screening, subjects are chosen who develop axilliary body malodour that is not unusually strong and who do not develop a stronger body malodour in one axilla compared with the other. Subjects who develop unusually strong body malodour, for example due to a diet including curry or garlic, are not selected for the panel.

~l~Z90Z ~.~020 US

~or t~o weel~s belore th~ s-tart oL a tes-t, the panel su~jects are assigned a non-deo~orant soap bar ~or exclusive use of ba-thin~ and are denied the use of any type o-~ deodorant or ~ntiperspiraII-t. At tlle end of this period, the 50 subjects are rando~ly divided in-to two groups of ~5. The control soap bars ~re tl~en applied to the le~t axillae of the iirst ~roup and the right axillae o~ the second, and the test soap bars are applied to the right axillae o~ the fir~t group and the left axillae of the second.
1~ The soap bars are applied by a technician using a standard technique in which a we-t ~lannel is soapedwith thesoa[) ~r ~or 15 seconds, the axilla is waslled with the soaped flannel ~or 30 qeconds, then wiped with a water rinsed flannel and dried witll a clean towel. Each subject then puts on a freshly laundered shirt, and 5 hours after application theo~ourintensit~
o~ e~ch subject is assessed, the left axilla o~ each subject ~eing ass~ssed before the right. The application and assess~ellt are carried out on each of four successive days.
The odour intensity is evaluated by all three assessors 0 who, operating without k~owledge o~ the soap bars used ~or eac~l subject or the result o~ evaluation of their ~ellow-assessors, snii~ each axilla and assign a score correspondin~r ! to the strength o~ the odour on a scale fro~ 0 to l5~ with 0 corresponding to no odour and 5 representin~ very stron~
_5 odour. Before evaluation each subject s-tands with his arms against his side: he then raises one arm straight overhead, flatteninO the axilla vault and ~akin~ it possible lor -the assessor's nose to be broug~lt close to the skin, the assessor mal.es an evaluation and the procedure is repeated with the other axilla.

B

llZ290Z C.1020 U~

S-tandard a~lueous solutions o~ isovaleric acid which correspollcl to each o:f the scores 1,2,3,~ and 5 are provided for re:ference to assist the assessors in -the evaluation.
rhese are shown i~ rable 1 belol~.
Table 1 Concentrations o~ aqueous solution o~ isovaleric Score Odour Leyel acid (ml/l) O No odour O
1 Slight 0.013 2 Definite 0.053 3 Moderate 0.22 Stron~ 0.87 Very strong 3.57 'rhe scores recorded by each assessor ~or each soap bar ~re averaged and the average score of the test soap bars deducted ~rom the average score of the control soap bars to ~ive ~ e deodorant value of the deodorant composition pre~ent in thé test ~oap bars.
As a check that the selection of panel subjects is satisfactory ~or operation o~ the test, the average score ~0 will~ the control soap ~ars should ~e between 2.5 and 3.5.
' More generally, deodorant value~ can be determined at other deodorant compo~ition concentrations or.with de-tergent produc-t~ o-ther than the ~tanclard soap bar using a test ~imilar to -the test de~cribed above. Later in this speci~ication examples are given o~ solid and liquid non-~oap~ detergent products.

_ 9 _ /---B

Z902 C.1020 us Although the inven-tion in its wiclest aspect pro~ides deodorant detergent products compri~ing deodorant composi-tions having a deodorant value o~ from 0.50 to 3.5, preferred deodorant detergen-t product~ are those comprising deodorant S composi-tions which have a deodoran-t value of at lea~t 0.60, or 0.70, or 0.80, or 0.90, or 1.00, or 1.20, the higher the minimum value, the more effective is the product as a deodorant detergent product a~ recorded by the assessors in the deodorant val~e test. It has also been noted that consumers, who are not trained assessors, can cletect by ~el~-assessment a noticeable reduction in body malodour where the deodoran-t value is at least 0.70, the higher the deodorant value above this ~igure, the more noticeable is the deodoran-t effect.
1. Non-soap Detergent Active Co~pound Non-soap dete.rgent active co~pounds suitable ~or use in deodoran-t detergent products o~ the invention can be non-soap anionic or nonionic or cationic or amphoteric or Zwitterionic ! in character. ~ypical non-soap anionic detergent-active compounds include water-soluble salts, particularly the alkali metal, ammonium and alkanolammonium salts, of organic sulphuxic reaction products having in their molecular structure an all~yl group containing ~rom about 8 to about 22 carbon atoms and a sulphu:ric acicl or sulphuric acid ester ~roup. (Includec7 in the term ~'alkyl~' is the alkyl portion o~ acyl groups).l Examples of this group of non-soap detergents ~hich can be used are the sodium and potassium alkyl sulphates, especially those 1~2Z9()Z C.1020 US

obtained by sulphating the higher alcohols (C8-C18 carbon atoms) produced by reducing the glycerides o~ tallow or coconut oil; and sodium and potassium alkyl benzene sulphonates, in ~hich -the all;yl group co~l-tain~ ~ro~ about S 9 to about 15 carbon atoms in straight chain or branched chain configuration.
Other non-soap anionic detergent-active compounds include the sodium alkyl glycerol ether sulphonates, especially those ethers or higher alcohols derived from tallow and coconut oil; sodium coconut oil ~atty acid monoglyceride sulphonates and sulphates; and sodium or potassium salts o~ alkyl phenol e-thylene o~ide ether sulphate containing about 1 to about 10 units oi ethylene o~ide per molecule and wherein the alkyl groups contain about 8 to about 12 carbon atoms.
.. . . . .
Other useful non-soap anionic detergent-active compounds include the water-soluble salts of es-ters of ~-sulphonated fatty acids containin~ from about 6 -to 20 carbon atoms in -the ester group; water-soluble salts of 2-acyloxy-alkane-1-sulphonic acids containing from about 2 to 9 carbon atoms in the acyl group and from about 9 to about 23 carbon atoms in the alkane moiety; alkyl ether sulphates containing from abQut 10 to 20 carbon atoms in the alkyl group and from about 1 to 30 moles o~ ethylene oxide; water-soluble salts of ole~in sulphona-tes containing ~rom about 12 to 2~ carbon atoms; and 6-alkyloxy alkane sulphonates containing from about 1 to 3 carbon aton~s in the alkyl group and from abou-t 8 to 20 carbon atoms in the alka~e moiety.

-- 11 -- /. . .

l~Z29()2 C.1020 U~

Preferred water-soluble non-soap anionic detergent-active compounds include linear alkyl benzene sulphonates con-taining from about 11 -to 1~ carbon atoms in the alkyl group: the tallow range (Clz 20) alkyl sulpha-tes; -the coconut range alkyl glyceryl sulphonates; and alkyl ether ~ulphate~ wherein the alkyl moiety contains from about 14 to 18 carbon atoms and wherein the average degree of ethoxylation varies between 1 and 6.
~peci~ic preferred non-~oap anionic detergent-acti~e compounds include: sodium linear C10-Cl2 alkyl benzene ~ulphonate triethanolamine C10-Cl2 alkyl benzene ~ulphonate;
sodium tallow alkylsulphate; and sodium coconut alkyl glyceryl ether sulphonate; and the sodium salt of a sulphated condensation produc-t of tallow alcohol with from about 3 to about 10 moles o-~ ethylene oxide.
It is to be understood that any of the foregoing anion:ic ~eter~ent-active compounds can be used ~eparately or as mixtures.
Examples o~ suitable nonionic detergent-active compounds are conden~ates of linear and branched chain aliphatic alcohol~
or carboxylic acids of from 8 to 18 carbon atoms with ethylene oxide, for instanoe a coconut alcohol-ethylene oxide conden~ate of 6 to 30 moles of ethylene oxide per mole of coconut alcohol;
condensates of alhylphenol~ ~hose alkyl group contains :~rom 6 to 12 carbon atoms with 5 to 2S moles of e-thylene oxide per mole of alkylphenol; condensates of the reac-tion product of ethylenediamine and propylene oxide with ethylene oxide, the B

l~Z90Z C.10~0 U~

condensates containin~ ~rom ~0 to 80% Of polyoxyethylene radicals by wei~ht and having a molecular weight of from 5,000 to 11,000; tertiary amine oxides o~ struc-ture R3N0, where one group R is an alhyL group o~ 8 -to 18 carbon a-toms and the others are each methyl, ethyl or hydroxyethyl groups, for instance dimethyldodecylamine oxide; tertiary phosphine oxides of structure R3P0, where one group R i~ an alkyl group of from 10 to 18 carbon atoms, and the others are each alkyl or hydroxyalkyl groups of 1 to 3 carbon a-toms, for instance dimethyldodecylphosphine oxide; and diall~yl sulphoxides o*
s-tructure R2S0 where the group R is an alkyl group of from 10 to 18 carbon atoms and the other is methyl or ethyl, for instance methyltetradecyl sulphoxide.
Suitable cationic detergent-active compounds are ! 1~ quaternary ammon:ium salts~ having an aliphatic radical of ~rom

8 to 18 carbcn atoms, ~or instance cetyltrimethyl a~onium bromide.
Examples of suitable amphoteric detergen-t-active compounds are de,.ivatives ol' aliphatic secondary and tertiary amines containing an alkyl group o~ 8 to 18 carbon atoms and an aliphatic radi^al sub~tituted by an anionic water-solubilising ~roup, for instance sodium 3-dodecylamino-propionate, sodium 3-dodecylaminop:ropane sulphonate and s~odium N-2-hydro.Yydodecyl-N-IIlethyltaurate.
Suitable zwitterionic deter~ent-ac~tive compounds are deriva-tives o~ aliphatic quaternary ammonium, sulphonium and phosphonium compounds having an aliphatic radical o~ from 8 to - 13 - /,., ~3, ~ il ZZ9 ~Z C.~020 US

-18 carbor1 atoms and an alipha-tic radical substi-tw-ted by an anionic water-solubilising group, for ins-tance 3-(N,N-dimethyl-N-hexadecylammonium)propane-l-su:Lphonate betaine, 3-(dodecyl~e-thyl sulphoniu~)propane-l-sulphonate be-taine and 3-(cetylmethylphosphonium)e-thane sulphonate betaine.
In addition to any o~ the above non-soap detergent-active compounds, soaps can optionally also be present.
Soaps are salts of fatty acids and include alkali metal soaps such as the sodium, potassium, ammonium and alkanol ammonium salts of higher fatty acids containing :erom about 8 to about 2 carbon a-toms, and pre~erably ~rom about lO to about 20 carbon a-toms. Particularly useful are the sodium and potassium and mono-, di- and triethanolamine salts of the mixtures o~
:eatty acids derived :erom coconu~ oil and tallow.
Further exa~ples of deter~ent-ac-tive compounds are compounds commonly used as sur~ace-active agents given in the well-kno~in textbooks "Sur~ace Active ~gen-ts", Volume 1 by Schwartz and Perry and "Surface Active ~ents and Detergents", Volume II by Schwartz, Perry and Berch.
The amount o~ non-soap detergent-active co~pound that can be incorporated into deodorant detergent products according to the invention is fro11l 0.5 to 99.99% by weight. The pre~erred amount will depend on the nature o~ -the product (i.e. whether it is liquid or solid and whether it comprises only non-soap detergents or both soap and non-soap detergen-ts).

r~
~3 ' , ~ C.1020 US

It can be stated generally -that the preferred amount of non-soap detergent active compound to be employed for solid products is within the range of from 5 to 95% by weight and for liquid produc-ts is within the range oi' from 5 to 80% by weight.

_ 15 -, ~lZ~9()Z c. 1()20 U~

2. 'rhe Deodorant Compo~ition 'rhe characteri~ation o~ the deodorant composi-tion of the invention present~ dif~icultie~, ~ince it cannot be defined ~olely in term~ of sub~tarlce~ of ~pecil'iecl ~truc-ture and S combinations in specified proportions. Neverthele~s, procedures have been discovered that enable the essential material~ of the deodorant compositions to be identified by test~.
The essential materials required for the formulation ol deodorant composition~ are th~se having a lipoxidase-inhibiting capacity of at lea~t 50% or tho~e having a Raoult vari~ e ratio of a-t least 1.1, a~ cleter~ined by the ~ollowing te~t~, which are de~ignate~ the lipoxidase and morpholine tests respectively.
The Lipoxiclase Test In this test the callacity of a material to inhibit the oxidation of linoleic acid by lipoxida~e- (ECl.13.1.13) to form a hydroperoxide i~ measured.
Aqueous 0.2M sodium borate solution (pH ~.0) i~ used a~ buffer ~olution.
A control substrate solution is prepared by dissolving linoleic acid (2.0 ml) in absolute ethanol (60 ml), diluting with distilled water to 100 ml and then adding ~orate buffer (100 ml) and absolute ethanol (300 ml).
A test sub~trate solution i~ preparecl in the sallle way a~ tlle control ~ub~tra-te solution except that for the absolute ethanol (300 ~Il) is substituted the same volulue of a 0.5% by by weig}lt ~olution in ethanol of the material to be tes-ted.

~ZZ9~2 C.1020 US

A solution of the enzymt-~ lipxoclase in the bora-tc bul-fer and llaVi.llg an ac-tivity within the range of from lS,OOO to gO,OOO units per ml is prepared.
The activi-ty ol the lipxo~iase iII catalysing -the oxida-tion of linoleic acid is ~irst assayed spectrophoto-metrically using the control. An automatic continuously recording ~pec-trophotometer is used and the increase in extinction at 239 nm (the peak of hydroperoxide) is measured to follow the course of oxidation, the enzyme concentration used beirl~ such that it gives an increase in optical density (~ OD) at 234 nm within the range of from 0.6 to 1.0 units per minute. Tlle follol~ing ingredients are placed in two 3 ml cuvettes:
Control (ml) Blank (ml) ..
! 15 Control substrate solution 0.10 0.10 solute el;hanol 0.10 0.10 Borate bu~er 2.75 2.80 Lipoxidase solution O.OS
The lipoxidase solution is added to the control cuvette last and the reaction immediately followed~spectrophoto-metrically for about 3 minute~, with recording of the increase in optical den~ity at 23~ nm as a curve on a graph.
'rhe capaci-ty of a material to inhibit the oxidation is the~ easured Usill~ a test sample co~ltaining enzyme, ~ubstrate and a deodor~lllt material. The follo-~in~ ingredients are placed in two 3 ml cuvettes.

_ 17 '~90Z
C.lO~O U~

Test ~ample (ml) BlaIlk (ml) Test substrate solu-tion 0 10 0.10 Absolute ethanol 0.10 0.10 Boratc buEEer 2.75 2.80 Lipoxidase solution 0.05 The lipoxidase solution is added to the test sa~ple cuvette last and the course o-~ the reaction immediately Eollowed as before.
The lipoxidase-inhibiting capacity of the material is then calculated from the formula 100 (Sl-S2)JSl, where Sl is the slope o~ the curve obtained with the control and ~2 is the slope of the curve obtained with the test sample, and thus expressed as ~0 inhibition. A material that gives ~t least 50%
inhibition in the test is herea~ter re~enred to as having a lipoxidase-inhibiting capacity of at least 50j'.
The Morpholine Test In this test the capacity o~ a material to depress the p~rtial vapour pressure of morpholine ~ore than that required by naoult's Law is measured. Substances thu~ undergo chemical - 20 reaction with morpholine, for example aldehyde~, are to be regarded as e~cluded ~rom the te~t.
Into a ~ample bottle of capacity 20 ml is introduced ~orpholine (lg) the bottle fitted with a serum cap and then ~ intained at 37C :Eor 30 minutes :Eor equilibrium to be reached.
The gas in the headspace o-~ the bottle is analysed by piercing the serum cap with a capillary needle through which nitrogen at 37C is passed to increase the pressure in the bottle by a _ 18 -D
D

~ ~Z Z~~ C.1020 US

standar~ al~ount ancl then allowing -the excess presfiure to injec-t a sa~ple ~rom the headspace into gas chromatograph apparatu~, ~hi~ n~lyses it arl~ provi~es a chro~atogra~hic trace curve with a pealc clue to luorpholine, the area under which is proportional to the amoullt of ~orpholine in the sa~ple The procedure is repeated under exa~tly -the sa~e conditions using instead of morpholine alone, morpholine (0.25g) and the material to be tested (lg); and also using the material (lg) without the morpholine to check ~hether it gives an interference with the morpholine peak (~hich is unusual ) .
The procedure is repeated until reproducible results are obtained. The areas under the morpholine pealcs are measured and any necessary correction due to interference by the ~aterial is ~ade.
A suitable apparatus for carrying out the above procedure is a Per~in-Elmer Automatic GC Multifract F90 for Head Space Analysis. l~ur-ther details of this method are described by Kolb in "CZ-Che~lie-Technilc", Vol 1, No 2, 87-91 (1972) and by Jentzsch et al in "Z. Anal. Chem." 236, 96-118 (1968).
The measured areas representing the morpholine concentration are proportional to the partial vapour pressure O:r I;he ~orpholine in the bottle heaclspace. IL A is the area under the morl)holine pealc wllen only morpholine is tested and A' is the area due to ~orpholine when a ma-terial is present, the relative lowering of partial vapour pressure of morpholine by the material is given by 1 - A 7JA.
*

trade mark - 19 - /

lC~
D

.1020 ~5 ~ccording *o Raoult's La~, if at a giverl temperature the p~rtial vapour pressure of morpholine in equilibrium with air above liquid ~orpholine is p, -the partial vapour pressure p~ exerte~] by morpholine in a homogeneous liquid mixture of morpholiIIe and material at the same temperature is pM/(M~PC), lYhere M and PC are the molar concentrations of morpholine and material. Hence, according to Raoult's La~ the relative lowering of morpholine partial vapour pressure (p-p')/p, is given by l-~/(M+PC), which under the circumstances of the test is 87/(87+m/~), where m is the molecular weight o~ the per~ume ~a~erial.
The exten-t to which the behaviour o e the ~ixture departs from Raoult's Law is given by the rakio , l-A'/A
87/(87~m/~
The above ratio, which will be reeerred to as the Raoult variance ratio, is calculated fro~ the tes-t resul-ts.
Where a material is a mixture of compounds, a calculated or experimentally determined average molecular weighk is used eor m, A material that depre~ses the partial vapour pres~ure o e morpholine by at least 10% l~ore than that required by l~aoult's-La~ is one in ~hich the Raoult variance ratio i~ at least 1.1.
A large number o~ materials ~hich satisfy one or both tests is described later in i;his speci~'ication and these are herea~ter reeerred to as "components", in contras-t to other materials which ~ail both tests which are re~erred to as "ingredient~".

c ~ C.1020 US

Before de~ining the more detailed a~pec-ts of the inven-tion so far as it relates to deodorant compo~itions, it is necessary to clarify some of the terms that will be emuloyed.
A compositiorl is a blencl ol organic com~ounds. ~'or the purposes of this specification i-t is nece~sary to identify the "com~ nents" in the composition. This is done by first describing the ^omposition in terms of four categories. These ca-tegories are given below. Examples of components in each category are provided.
1) Single chemical compounds whether natural or synthetic, e.g. coumarin (natural or synthetic), ifio-eugenol, benzyl salicylate. The ~ajority of components are in this category.
2) Synthetic reaction products (products oI reaction), ! 15 mixtures of isomers and possibly ho~ologues, e.g.
~-iso-methyl ionone.
3) Natural oils, gumfi and resins, and their extracts, e.g. patchouli oil, geranium oil, clove leaf oil, ¦ ben~oin resinoid.
I 20 ~) Synthetic analogues of category 3. This cate~ory include~ materials that are not strict analogues ¦ of natural oils, ~ums and resins bu-t are materials tllat result from attempts to copy or improve upon materials of cate~ory 3, e.g. Bergamot AB ~30, ~ Geranium AB 76, Pomeransol AB 31~.
Components of Categories (3) and (~) although often uncharacterised chemically are available commercially.

' l l~Z90Z C . 1020 U~

l~ere a material is supplied or used conventionally for convellience as a ~ixture, e.g. p-t-Amylcycloh,exanone diluted with diethyl phthalate, for the purposes of this specification -two co~ponents are present, so that use o~ 5%
of a blend o~ 1 part of this ketone and 9 parts of diethyl phthalate is represented as 0. 5~0 o-f the l~etone and ~. 5/0 of diethyl phthalate.
It has been found advantageous in ~ormulating the most effective deodorant composition for incorporation into the detergent product of the invention to use components that, as well as satisfying the lipo~idase or morpholine tests, satisfy further conditionfi. These conditions are:
i) there must be at least five component~ present, ii) each of the~e components must be selected from at least four dif~erent chemical classes (to be ~ defined below)j iii) a component from each of classes 1,2 and 4 must be present, iv) at leas-t ~5%, preferably at least 50 and most preferably fro~ 60 to 100%~ by weight of the deodorant co~lposition must compri~e components, .
v) a component is not considered to contribute to the efficacy of the deodorant composition if it is present in the deodoran-t composition at a 2~ concentration of less than 0.5% by ~eight, and _ 22 _ ~ ZgO ~ C.1020 U~

vi) a cla6~ is not considercd to contribu-te -to $he ef~icacy of the deodorant composi-tion if it is present in -the deodoran-t composition at a concentra-tion o~ le~ than 0. 5~,h -by ~e:ight.
Therefore, according to a preferred e~bodi~ent o~ the invention, there is provided a deodorant detergent product as herein de~ined in which the deodorant composition consists es~entially of ~rom about 45 to 100% by weigh-t o~ at least five components and from 0 to about 55% by weight of ingredients, each o~ the components being selected ~rom components having a lipoxidase inhibiting capacity of at least 50~/0 and components having a Raoult variance ratio of at leas-t 1.1, the components and ingredients being so chosen that the deodoran-t value o~
the deodorant composition is within the range 0.50 to 3.5.
Each comuonent 6hould be allocated -to one o~ six clas~es. These classes are:
Class 1 - Phenolic substances Class 2 - Essential oils, extracts, resins, "synthetic" oils (denoted by "AB"~
Cla~ 3 - Aldehyde~ and ketones;
Clas~ 9 - Polycyclic compound~;
Cla~ 5 - E~ter~;
Class 6 - Alcohols.

B

l~Z~902 C.1020 US

In attribu-ting a component to a clas~, -the following rule~ are to be observed. l~ere the componen-t could be assiglled to more than one cla~s, the co~ponen-t is allocated to the cla~s occurring -~irst in the order ~iven above: for example clove oil, which is phenolic in character, i~ placed in Cla~s 1 although it otherwi~e might have been allocated to Cla~s 2. Similarly, 2-n-heptyl cyclopentanone which i~ a polycyclic ketone is attributed to Class 3 instead o~ Cla~s ~.
q`he following are examules of deodorant components that either have a lipoxidase inhibi-ting capacity (LIC) of at lea~t 50~o or have a Raoul-t variance ra-tio (RVR) of a-t least 1.1. ~heir class, molecular weight (m), LIC and R~R as deterlllinedby-the-tes-ts alreadydescribed hereinare also listed.
The no~enclature adopted for the componen-ts li~ted below and for the ingredients whicll appear in the deodorant formulati.ons of the Example~ is, so far as i~ pos~ible, that employed by Steffen Arctander in "Per~ume and Flavour Chemicals (Aroma Che~ical~)" Volume I and II (19G9) and the "Perfume &
l~lavour Materials of Natural Origin" (196~) by the same autho.r.
Where a co~ponent or other ingredient i~ not described by ~rctander, then either the che~ical name i~ given or, where thi~ is not Icnown (~ucll as is the case with perfu~ery house specialitie~), then the ~upplier's identity can be e~tablished by re:l`e:renee to the ~ppendi~ which appears at the end of the specil`ication.

_ 29 -llZZ9~Z (,.lo~o us C~ass 1 - Phenolic Sub~-tance~
_ _ _ . _ LIC ~VR m ., iso-A~yl ~alicylate 95 1.~ 208 ~ Ben~yl saLicylate O 1.58 228 5 Carvacrol 32 1.~3 150 Clove leaf oil 79 1.~3 16~
Ethyl vanillin 100 1.~3 152 i~o-Eugenol 100 1.~8 164 L~G 201 100 1.~1 196 Mous~e de chene ~ugo 98 1.29 182 l~amento lea~ oil lVO - 165 Thy~e oil red 55 1.37 150 Class 2 - Es _ntial oils extracts, re~ins, "synthetic" oils.
! ~0 ~ ed by "AB") Ben~oin Sia~ resinoids - 87 Ber~a~ot A~ 37 - . 58 0.97 175 Ber~amot AB ~30 58 0.97 175 Geraniu~ AB 76 26 1.29 154 Geranium oil 26 1.29 15~
Opoponax resinoid 96 1.33 150 cl~ li oil 7~) 1.25 1~0 Petit~rain oil 3~ 1.27 175 I'ol~lerarlsol AB 31~ 100 _ 25 '' , ~ ~ z ~ ~z C.1020 Class 3 _ Al(lehydes and Ketones I,IC RVR m 6-A(e~;yl-l,],3,9,~,6-ho.~ let:llyl-~e~r~lly~lro~ h~ lelle 1()() 1.. 03 258 p-t-Amyl cyclohexanone 50 l.lO 182 p-t-Butyl-~-~ethyl hydrocinrla~ic aldehyde 74 - 204 2-n-~reptylcyclopen~anone 56 l.05 182 o~-iso-Methyl ionone lO0 l.13 20G
~-Methyl naphthyl ketone lO0 0.96 170 Class 4 - Polyc~ic Co~pounds LIC RVR m -Coumarin 58 i.22 l96 l,3,4,G,7,8-Hexahydro-9,6,6,7,8,8-l r~ ~l cx~ y] cyc l ol) ell l;~ - l) e~ o - ' ' pyran lO0 - 240 3a_Methyl-dodecahydro-6 6,9a-trimethylnaphtho(2,l-b3~uran 58 1.30 230 ~ -~aphthyl methyl ether lO0 . - 158 Class 5 - ~sters LIC RVR Dl o-t-Butylcyclohexyl acetate 52 l.08 198 p~t-Butylcyclohexyl acetate 59 0.98 198 l)ietllyl plltllalate 79 1.20 222 ~5 Nonaned.iol-l,3-diacetate 33 l.17 299 Nona1lolide-l:9 92 0.87 l56 i-Nonyl acetate 50 O.X3 l86 i-Nonyl l`or~late 19 l.99 172 _ 26 _ ~

.

~zz~)z ' ~ . 10~0 'U~

~ 1 ~ S S ~ - ~ 1 C 0~1 0 1 ~
`~ LlC RVR m ~ yrcetol 1~ 1.22 15~
l'henylethyl a'Lcohol ~2 1.2~ 122 'retrahydro~uguol 29 1.23 158 It has been shown that for best re~ults, a certain minimum average concentration of components should be present.
his mil~i~um concentration i~ a function Oe the nu~ber Oe clas~es present - the more classes present, the lo~er the minimu~
concentration. The minimum average concentration in the various ~ituation~ that can apply is sllown in the Table below:
Number Oe classes Average concentration represented in Oe components deodorant composition mini~um not pre~erably not less than (/0) less tl~an (,~_ ~.S 5.5 6 ~.5 5 Also, it is prererred that at least 1% of each of ~our classes i5 present in the deodorant composition, but individual components ~hich are present at a concentration o~ less than O . 5/o are eliminated Erom this calculation, as is the class into which they l'ail if there is present no component at a concentration o~ at le~st 0.5~/o which -falls within that class.
~lore speciI:icaLly, tl~e invention a'l~o provide~ a deodoran-l detergent product as herein defined wherein the amount of deodorant co~ponent~ in the deodorant composition present in the cl'asses 1,2 and ~ as herein defined is at least 1%~ most pre-eerably - 2~ _ 112Z~oz ~.1020 U~

at leas-t 3% by weight of the deodorant compo~ition for each i clas~, an~ the amourlt o~` componerlts presen-t in each of at least t~o other classe~ is at least 1% by weight of the composition, provided also that any componellt -that i~ ~)resellt il~ the deodorant composition at a concentra-tion of les~ than a threshold value of 0. 5% by weight i~ eliminated from the calculation of the amounts of components in each clas~.
Although at leas-t four dif~erent classes of components should preferably be represented in the deodoran-t composition, superior compositions can be obtained if more than ~our classes are r~e~resented. Accordingly, five or six classe~ can be ¦ represented in the deodorant co~osition.
I It has been shown by the preparation, examination and ¦ testing of many hulldreds of deodorant compositions that the lS l~est re~ult~ are ob-taino.l by keeping ~ithin the aforemen-tiorled rules when selecting types and amount~ of components and ingredient~. For example~ deodorant composition~ which contain less than the minimum concentration of co~lponents of ~5~0 are unlil~ely to resul-t in a deodorant composition having a deodoran-t value of at lea~t 0.50. Therefore, in preparing the best deodorant compo~itiorls of the invention, the rules for ~election of components according to their classification, the representation of di~feren-t classes, the amounts of each col~ponent present, bearing in ~lind the threshold value belo~
l~hich it is believed a co~ponent will not signi~icantly contri~ute, are all i~lportant to observe if the bes-t results are to be obtained.

_ 28 - J

l~ZZ902 - 29 - C.1020 EP

It should be explained that components present in the deodorant detergent product for purposes other than obtaining deodorant effects, for example an adjunct like the anti-oxidant, are excluded from the operation oE the preceding instructions to the extent that the component is required for that other purpose. The levels at which adjuncts are conventionally present in detergent products is well-established for established materials and readily determinable for new materials so that the application of the above exclusion presents no difficulty.

Deodorant compositions can be incorporated in deodorant detergent products according to the invention, at a concentration of from 0.01 to 10%, preferably from 0.5 to 5% and most preferably from 1 to 3% by weight.

When the detergent composition is intended for fabric washing, then the concentration of the deodorant composition is preferably from 0.05 to 3%, most preferably from 0.1 to 1% by weight.

It is apparent that if less than 0.01~ of a deodorant composition is employed, then use of the detergent product is unlikely to provide a significant reduction in body malodour intensity. If more than 10% of a deodorant composition is employed, then use of the detergent product is unlikely to further reduce body malodour intensity beyond that observed at the 10% level.
B

llZ~OZ C.1020 US

3. De-ter~en_ Ad,junct~
Deodorant detergen-t products of the invention can contain other detergent composition ingredients (adjuncts), Yor ins-tance ~equestrcln-ts, ~llilders, soil release a~en-ts 7 anti-redeposition agen-ts, superfat-ting agents such as Eree long-chain Yatt~ acidfi, lather boosters such as coconut monoethanol-amide; lather controllers; inorganic salts such as sodium and magnesium sulpha-tes; moisturisers; plasticisers and -thickeners; opacifiers, colourants, fluorescers, bleaching agents, perfumes, germicides, and other deodorant ma-terials such as zinc ricinolea-te. The produc-t can also contain water.
The total amount of detergent adjuncts that can be incorporated in-to the deodorant detergent product according to the invention will normally form the balance oE the product after accounting for the deodoran-t compositioll and the detergent-aotive compound. The detergent adjuncts will accordingly form from 0 to 99.~9% by weight of the product.
Product Types and Formulations The deodorant detergent product can be formulated as a solid product, for example in the form of a bar such as a perfional wa~hing bar or laundry bar, or a powder which can be used for personal washinO or for fabric ~a~hing.
Alternatively, the product can take the form oY a liquid product Yor use in personal or Iabric washing or for use as a shampoo or foam bath product.

- 30 - /~

1:3 ~ 2 ~. 1020 ~S

As a further alternative, the composition can -take the form of a gelled product for use in personal washing, ~or example as a shower gel, or for fabric ~lashing.
It is to be un~ers-toocl that -the lorcgoing proclucts are S examples of forms which the deodorant detergent produc-t can take: other product ~orms within the purview o~ the ar-t are to be included within the ~cope o~ monopoly claimed.
~he invention is further illustrated by the following examples of detergent product formulations which can be used as a basis for incorporating deodorant compositions at a concen-tration of from 0.01 to 10% by weigh-t to form deodorant deter~ent products according to the invention.
Examples of the detergent bars containing non-soap deter~ents which can be employed as a basis for incorporation ].5 o~ a deodorallt perfume -to provide deodorant detergent products according to the invention are as ~ollow~:
Detor~ent bar A ~0~
Sodiwu acylisethionate ~8.6 Sodium dodecylbenzene sulphonate2.0 Sodiwu soap 11.0 Coconut oil fatty acid 3.0 Stearic acid 21.7 Other ingredients including inorganic sal-ts, titanium dioxide, colouring matter ` 8.5 l~ater to 100 llZZ902 C.1020 US

Deter~ent ar B ~/O w/w Sodium Cll-Clg alkane sulphonate22.1 Sodium C15-C18 alkane sulphonate29.~
Sodiulll ClG-C18 ole~in sulphonate22.1 Myris-tyl'alcohol 6.3 Cetyl alcohol 5.0 Stearyl alcohol 5.0 Other ingredients including inorganic salt~, titanium dioxide, colouring matter 5.2 Water to 100 Deter~ent bar C /0 w/w Disodium salt o~ a sulphonated hardened tallow fatty acid 27.6 Disodium salt oi a sulphonated coconut oil fatty acid 14.6 Sodiu~ Cll-C15 alkyl sulphate -- 28.1 Myris-tyl alcohol 11.1 Other ingredients including inorganic salts, titanium dioxide, colouring matter 7.3 Water to 100 ~. .

~zz~o~

- 32a - C.1020 ~P
.
Laundry ~ r D ~ y C6-C16 alkyl ben~ene sulphonate 28 ~odium tripolypho~phate 23 Calcium carbonate 23.
5 ~odium carbonate 10 ~odium carboxymethylcellulo~e 1.~2 ~ater 6.5 Other ingredients including titanium dioxide, fluore~cer, colouring matter and inorganic ~alt~ to 100 . Laundry Bar E ~o~
C6-C16 alkyl benzene ~ulphonate 15 ~odium tripol~pho~phate 15 Calcium carbonate 37 15 ~tarch - 7 ~odium carbonate - ~0 ~odium carbox~ethylcellulo~e 0.71 l~ater 11 Other ingredient~ includin~ titanium dioxide, ~luore~cer, colouring matter and inorganic ~alt~ . to 100 Laundry ~ar F % w/w , C6-C16 alkyl benzene sulphonate 32 Sodium pyrophosphate 10 25 Calcium carbonate ~
~odium carbonate 5 ~ater Other ingredients including titanium dioxide, fluorescer, colouring mat-ter and inorganic salts to 100 .

ll~Z902 - 32b - C.1020 EP

An exa~ple of a liquid product which can be employed as a basis for incorporation of a deodorant composition to provide a deodorant detergent product according to the invention is as Eollows:

llZ2902 c. 1020 US

Liquid detergent product ~w~
Sodium lauryl e-ther sulpha-te (28% AD) 30.0 Sodium N-lauroyl ~arco~inate (97% AD)4.0 Sodiu~ la-uryl polyglycol ether oxyace-tic acid g.0 Stearic acid polyglycol e~ter 2.0 Polyethylene glycol 400 1.0 Cetyl alcohol 1.0 Vinyl pyrrolidone/styrene copolymer3.0 Water to 100 Example~ of ~oam bath produc-ts which can be employed a~ a ba~i~ for incorporation of a deodorant composition to provide deodorant detergent product~ according to the invention are as follow~:
Foam bath A o/b w/~
- .
Diethylamine and monobutylethanolamine ~alt oI lauryl ether sulphate (C12:C~
70:30, 2,2~) 100% ~ 20 Monolaurin 5 Ethoxylated (5E0) copra monoethanolamide 3 Colour, water to 100 Foam Bath B % w/w ~ . .
Sodium lauryl ether ~ulphate (28% A~) 54 Monolaurin 5 ~ mixture of e-thoxylated ( 8 to 10 E0) C8-C12 ~lYCeride~ 6 Carbitol 3 Colour, wa-ter -to 100 - 33 - /,,, 112~{)2 C.1020 u~

Foam bath C % w/w Triethanolamine salt of ].auryl sulpha-te (4 2~/o ~D) 29 Diethylamine and monobutyle-thanolamine sal-t oE lcuryl ~ther sulphate (C12:Cl~ = 70 30~
2.2 130) 100% l~D ~ 10 Monolaurin 5 ~thoxylated (S~) copra monoe-thanolamide 3 Colour 0 15 Water to 100 Foam bath D D/o Lauryl (poly-l-o~apropene) oxaethane carbox~lic acid (100% AD) 35 Diethylamine and monobu-tylethanolamine salt o~ lauryl ether ~ulphate (Cl :C
78/30; 2.2E0) (100% AD) 2 ~14 12 Triglyceride C8-C12 fatty acids 35 E-thoxyla-ted (5~) copra monoe-thanolamide 8 Copra diethanolamide 5 Colour 0.5 Water to 100 Foam bath E % w/w Lauryl (poly-l-oxapropene) oxaethane carboxylic acid (100% AD) 35 ~5 Diethylamine and monobutylethanolamine salt of lauryl ether sulphate Cl :C. 70:30, 2.2E0) ( 100% AD) 2 1~ 12 Paraf:Ein oil 35 Ethoxylated (5E~) copra monoethanolamide 8 Copra diethanolamide S
Colour 0.5 Water to 100 - 3~ -~ .

~lZZ9()2 C. 1020 US

Foam ba-th F /0 w/~
C12-Clg dimethylamine oxicle (30/0 AD) 50 Lauryl(poly~l-oxapropene)oxaethane carboxylic acid (90~0 AD) 5.5 S Polymer JR 400 Ethoxylated (5~~) copra monoe-thanolamide 2 Colour 0.5 Water to 100 Foam bath G ~0 w/w Sodium lauryl ether sulphate (3~) (28% AD) 71.50 F,thoxylated (5~) copra monoethanolamide (100% AD) 2 Polymer JR 400 Colour 5 lS l~ater to 100 Foa~ bath H
Sodium lauryl e-ther ~ulphate 3E0 (28% AD) 36 C12-Cl~ dimethylamine oxide (30% AD) 16.5 Lauryl(poly-l-oxapropene)oxaethane carboxylic acid (90% AD) 5.5 Polymer JR 400 Ethoxylated (5E~) copra monoethanolamie (100% AD) 2 Carbitol 3 l~ater to 100 ~lZZ90Z ~.1020 ~S

Foam_bath I
Lauryl(poly-l-oxapropane)oxae-thane carbo.Yylic mono~utylethanolamine salt (90% AD) 20 5 Monolaurin ~
Ethoxylated (5~) copra monoethanolamide 3 Colour, water -to 100 Examples of shower gels whi~h can be employed a~ a ~asis ~or incorporation of a deodorant composition to provide deodorant detergent product~ according to the invention are as follows:
Sho~yer gel A
Triethanolamine salt of lauryl sulphate ~0 Die-thylamine and monobutylethanolamine salt of lauryl ether sulphate (C12 C 70 30, 2.2~-) 100% AD -10 Monolaurin 8 Colour 0.15 l~ater to 100 Sho~Yer ~el B ~0 ~Y/W
Monoe-thanolamine soap of C12_Cl8 ~atty acids 16.7 C12_C18 fatty acids 1.5 Sodium acyl ise-thionate 1.0 Coconut diethanolamide 3.0 Glycerol . 0.5 Distilled ~Yater to 100 The shower gel ha~ a pH value of 8.5-9.0 anfl a viscosity o~ 2000-6000 cps.

B

~2902 C.1020 US

Shower gel_C o~o w/w Sodium myristyl laur 1 ether sulpha-te 3~ (Cl2-cl~ = 35 G5~ - 27~/o l~D GO. O
Coconut die-thanola~ide 2.0 For~alclehyde (30%) 0.2 Sodium hexametaphosphate 1.0 Citric acid 0.12 Sodium chloride 1.15 Water, colourant to 100 An example of a shampoo employed as a ba~is for incorporation oI a deodorant co~position to pro~:ide a deoc70rant de-tergent product according -to the invention is as follo~s:
Shampoo /0 w/w Sodium salt of triethoxyla-ted lauryl/
myris-tyl sulpha-te 12 Lauryl/myristyl dimethyl betaine 2 Coconu-t diethanola~ide Sodium chloride 2.20 Formaldehyde (40% aqueous ~olution) 0.08 Water to 100 pH adjusted to 7.g with lactic acicl This shampoo has a viscosity of about 500 centipoise~
(Brookfield viscometer, spindle No 2 at 20 rpm a-t 25C). ~he anionic detergent consisted of about 5S% lauryl and ~5%
myri~tyl materials.

~Lz29()z C.lO~O US

Examples of ~abric washing powders which can be employed as a basis ~or incorporation of a deodorarlt composition to provide a deoclorant de-tergent product according to -the inventioll are as Lollows:
Fabric washing powder A % w!w Sodium C13-C18 alkane sulphonate 8.0 C16 20 n-alcohol + 25 moles ethylene oxide 3.4 Sodium soap (containing 4 parts tallow ~atty acid to 1 part coconut fatty acid)3.~
Pentasodium tripolyphosphate 37.3 Sodium sulphate 6.7 Sodium carboxymethylcellulose 2.0 E-thylene diamine tetra acetic acid 1.0 Magnesium ~ilicate 2.0 ~luorescer 0~3 Wa-terglass powder (Na20:SiO2 - 1:3.4) 5.9 Sodium carbonate 1.0 Sodium perborate monohydrate 19.0 Water 10.0 W

ll~Z~2 C.1020 US

Fabric wa~hln~ powc7er B ~ ~
. ~
Cll 15 n-alcohol + 7 mole~ ethylene oxide 12 Pentasodium tripolyphosphate 37-3 So~ium ~ulphate 6.7 5Sodium carboxymethylcellulose 2.0 Ethylenediamine tetracetic acid 1.0 ~agnesium silicate 2.0 Fluore~cer 0~3 lrater gla~# powder (Na20:SiO2 = 1:3~) 5.9 10Sodium carbonate 1.0 Sodium perborate monohydrate 19.0 Water to 100 Fabric ~ashin~ powder C ~0 w/w Sodium dodecyl benzene ~ulphonate . I4 15Sodium tripolyphosphate ~0 Sodium sulphate 2 Sodium carboxymethylcellulo~e Ethylene diamine tetraacetic acid ~agne~ium silicate 2 ~luorescer 0-3 lYater gla~ powder (Na20:SiO2 _ 1:3.~) 5.9 Sodium carbonate 1.0 Sodium perbora-te monohydrate 25 l~ater -to 100 ~ ~ Z~ ~Z ~.lOZO US

Fabric wasll~_~_wcler D % W¦W
Sodium dodecyl benzene ~ulphonate 8 Tallo~ alcohol ~ulphate 6 Si)dium -tripol.ypho~pha-te 90 Sodium ~ulphate 2 Sodium carboxymethyl cellulo~e Ethylene diamine tetraacetic acid Magnesium silicate 2 Fluorescer 0-3 Water glass powder (Na20:SiO2 = 1:3.~) 5.9 Sodium carbonate 1.0 Sodium perborate monohydra-te 25 Water to 100 Fabric wa~hing powder E /0 w/w Sodium dodecyl benzene ~ulphona-te 15 ~Tallow alcohol 18 EO ~3 Tallow alcohol 12 EO 3 Sodium ~tearate (soap) 6 Sodium -tripolyphosphate ~0 Sodium silicate 5 Sodium carboxymethylcellulo~e 2 Fluorescer 0.2 EDTA 0.2 Enzyme O.66 Sodium sulphate 1~
Water to 100 - ~0 - /. . .

~ ~) ~Z2~Z C~102Q ~S

Fabric washin~ pol_ der F ~/o w/~
Sodium dodecyl benzene sulphonate15 Tallow alcohol 18E0 2.5 Tallo~Y alcollol L2E0 2.5 ~odium tripolyphosphate 30 ~odium silicate 5 Sodium sulphate 25 Enzymes 0.66 EDT~ 0.2 Fluorescer 0.2 Sodi.um carboxymethylcellulose 2 Water to 100 Eæamples of fabric washing liquids which can be employed as a basis lor incorporation of a deodorant co~position to provide a deodorant detergent product according to the invention are a~ follows: . :
~abric washing liquid A ~0 w/w Condensation product containing 7 moles ethylene oxide with a synthetic Cl~_15 alcohol ~0.0 Triethanolamine ~alt o~ alkyl benzene sulphonate 19.8 Triethanolamine 5-0 Ethanol 5.0 Po-tassium chloride 2.5 Fluorescer and colouring matter 0.9 Water to 100 B

~lZZ902 C.1020 U~

Fabric l~a~hing li~uicl B % w~w ~lkyl G12 to C15 alcohol '3E0 8 So~ium xylene ~ulphonate 2 Socl~ m pyropho~phate 2.8 Pota~sium pyrophosphate 22 Sodium silicate 3 Sodium carboxymethylcellulose O. 38 Fluore~cer 0.1 Water to 100 An example o~ a detergent ba~ed deodorant cream which can be employed a~ a basi~ for incorporation of a deodorant compo~ition to provide a deodorant de-tergant product according to the invention i~ a~ ~ollows:
Deodorant cream h /o ~w ~odium acyli~ethionate (IGEPON A) - 80% hD 10 Sucro~e decyl gluco~idic (C -C e~ter) (TRI~ON*CG 110) - 70% AD 8 10 Monolaurin 3 Stearyl dimethylamine oxide (AMMONYX 50) ~
25% hD
Sodium lactate (60%) Bentone EW (ge'lling agent~ 2.5 Colourant pearle~cent agent 0.25 Water . to 100 *

trade mark - 4~ -;;~

llZZ~02 C.1020 U~

Process for Preparin~ Deodorant Deter~ent ~roducts The process ~or preparing deodorant detergent products thereby employing a deodorant compo~i-tion as a ~eans ~or inh:ibiting bocly ~aloclour develop~lent co3nprises ~ixirl~ with non-soap detergent-active compounds and de-tergent adjuncts, if present, from 0.01 to 10% by weight of a deodorant composition to provide a deodorant detergent product, the deodorant composition pre~erably having a deodorant value o~
at least 0.50 as measured by the Deodoran-t Value Test. The selection of non-soap deter~ent active co~pounds and deter~en-t adjuncts and their respective amounts employed in the proces~
of the invention will depend upon the nature of the required detergent product (e.g. solid or liquid) and -the purpose for which it is required (e.g. for personal use or ~or ~abric washing).
Usually it is convenient to add the deodorant composition to the detergent product at a stage towards the end of its manu~acture so that loss o~ any volatile ingredients such as may occur during a heating step is mini~ised.
It is furthermore usual to incorpora-tc the deodoran-t composition in such a manner that it is thoroughly mixed with the other in~redients and is uni~orluly distributed througho~t the detergent product. It is however also pos~ible, particularly w:ith solid protlucts such as marbled personal washing or laundry bars and speclcled or spottecl solid or liquicl products, where the deodorant co~posi-tion can be encapsulated to delay its subsequent release, to provide detergent products B

~lZ~9()Z C.1020 US

where the deodorant composition is no-t uniformly ancl homogeneously mixed with the other ingredients o:c the detergent product, ancl i~ concentrated in the marbled bands of the speclcled or spotted parts of such prod-ucts.
Method o~ Using the Deodorant D_tergent_Produc-t ~he deodorant detergent product of the invention is to be employed particularly Ior suppre~sing human body malodour, either by applying it direc-tly to the skin in a personal washing mode or by laundering garments which are subsequently to be worn in con-tact with the skin. The deodorant detergent product is particularly ef~ective when applied by either o~
the~e tl~o modes to the regions oI the hu~an skin ~here apocrine sl~eat glands are most abundant, notably in the groin, axilla, anal and genital regions and in the areola o-f the nipple.
In use, the deodoran-t detergent personal washing product can Ior example be employed accordin~ to the procedure described herein as the Deodorant Value Test. When the product is a liquid or gel intended for personal use, for example a shower gel, the product can first be lathered on a damp cloth and then applied to the skin and Iinally rinsed in a washing mode.
In use, the deodorant cleter~ent Iclbric wclshin~ product can for exa~ple be applied to a garment according to conventional laundering procedures involving wa-ter washing, rinsing and drying. It is apparent that sufficient oE the deodorant co~position is delivered to and remains on the fabric of laundered garments to subsequen-tly enable the wearer .

B

ll~Z902 C.1020 US

to benefit from it~ deodorising effect by reduc-tion o~ body malodour.
The following laundering procedure is given to iLlustra-te the application of a deodoran-t de-tergen-t fabric washing product to shirts.
Polyester cotton coa-t style bu-t-ton through shirts were washed in an automatic washing machine using a nonionic de-tergent ~abric ~Yashing powder containing as a nonionic g ctive Cll_ls n-alcohol 7E~ at a concentration of 12~ and a deodorant composition at a concentr~tion o~ 0. 2~o by weight o~ the product. The concentration o~ the product in the wash liquor was 0.4% by weight of the liquor. The ratio of shirt ~abric (dry weight basis) to wash liquor was 40g fabric per litre wash liquor.
The shirts were agitated in the wash liquor ~or lO
minu-tes at a temperature of 50C, then rinsed and spun to a moisture content o~ about 50% ~Yater and ~inally line dried to a moisture conten-t of not greater than 10%.
The shirts were folded and stored until required ~or use.

- ~5 - J...

~ .

~l;ZZ~3102 - ~6 - C.1020 EP

The invention is illustrated by the following examples in which all parts and percentages are by weight.

~ t should be noted that each of these products was evaluated in a manner similar to that described for the Deodorant Value Test referred to hereinbefore. However, in view of the fact that testing the products involved the assessment of body malodour after wearing a shirt which had been washed with such a product, or following washing the axillae with a product other than a soap bar (instead of by washing the axillae with a standard soap bar containing the deodorant composition previously described as the Deodorant Value Test) the effectiveness of each product was expressed in terms of "odour reduction value".

It should be recognised that if an odour reduction value of less than 0.50 is recorded following use of products of the invention, it is indicative that insufficient deodorant composition has been transferred to the skin of the axilla, rather than evidence that the product itself contains insufficient of a deodorant composition as herein defined.

Example I

In this example, the effect of a deodorant composition incorporated in a non-soap detergent (NSD) fabric washing powder was evaluated by the Deodorant Value Test referred to above but modified in the following manner.

Polyester cotton coat style button through shirts were first prewashed in an automatic washing machine using a nonionic detergent fabric washing powder. This was to ensure that the shirts to be used in the test were all equally clean and free from dressing prior to washing in - 46a - C~1020 EP

the deodorant fabric washing product.

The washed shirts were line dried and then washed again in the automatic washing machine. The test NSD
fabric washing product was then added to the wash liquor at a concentration of 0.4% by weight of the liquor. The ratio of shirt fabric (dry weight basis) to wash liquor was 40g fabric per litre wash liquor.

The shirts were agitated in the wash liquor for 10 minutes at a temperature of 50C, then rinsed and spun to a moisture content of about 50% water and finally line dried to a moisture content of not greater than 10%.

~lZZ9(~;2 - 47 - C.1020 EP

A further batch of prewashed shirts which were to serve as control shirts were washed again and then dried under similar conditions except that deodorant compos;tion was omitted from the fabric washing product addecl to the wash liquor.

The shirts were folded and stored overnight in polythene bags until required for testing by a panel of male subjects and assessing for odour by a panel of female assessors.

The above procedure was repeated on four consecutive days without prewashing, half of the subjects wearing shirts treated with the deodorant composition-containing detergent product and half wearing control shirts without deodorant composition treatment.

Body odour transferred to the shirts in th-e region of the axillae was assessed by the trained female assessors in the manner described in the Deodorant Value Test, the odour of the shirt fabric bein~ scored in each case rather than the axillae of the panel subjects, and the results expressed an odour reduction value.

The formulation of the fabric washing product was that described herein before as Fabric Washing Powder C.

Test fabric washing product was prepared by the addition of 0.2 parts of a deodorant composition to 99.8 parts of the above formulation.

The formulation of deodorant composition 1 was as follows:

.

~ZZ902 C.1020 U~

~)eodor~lnt ~o~osition 1 . . . _ . _ Co~onc~-l;s l'arts Clc-ss ~l~otal in class iso-Aulyl sa]icylate 5.0 ~en~yl salicylate 9.0 1 ~ -lO.:~5 LI~G 201 1.25 Bergamot AB 930 15.0 2 Geraniu~ AB 7G 9.0 2 ~ 20.7 Opoponax resinoid 1.7 2 1,3,9.,6,7,8-Hexahydro-9,6,6,7,-8,8-hexa~ethylcyclopenta-~-2-l)en~opyran 10.0 9 10.0 o-t-Butylcyclohexyl ace-ta-te 0.5 5 ~ ~.25 Diethyl l~hthala-te 3.75 5 Nonanolide-l,9 0.2 (5) ~ edients A~er A~ 358 3.0 nenYJyl alcohol 0.15 Cedar atlas oil 5.0 Citronellol 7.0 Ci-tronella oil 16.1 Citronellyloxyacetaldehyde 0.5 Mexyl aldone 0-7 Jas~:in AB 28~ 12.0 Orange oil sweet 8.0 10-Undecen-l-al 0.15 Vetyver-t oil 2.0 100 . O
eli~inated ~ro~ calcula-ti.on - below threshold value o~ 0.5 98 - /Ø

~ .
' , .

~L;ZZ90Z
C.]020 I~S

Total amount of components ~5.2 Number of components present 9 Average amount of each component 5.0 Number of classes represented Results of Deodorant Value Test 1 using NSD Powder ._ ___ Control Powder ~est Powder Average score~ 2.9~ 1.9~
Odour ~eduction Value 0.97 By way of comparison, the Deodorant Value of the Deodoran-t Composition 1 was also determined in the standard 80/20/5 soap base as described in the Deodorant Value Test.
Results of_Deodorant Value Test 1 usin~ 80/20/5`soap base bar Control bar Tes-t bar Average scores 3~6 2.93 Deodorant value 0.53 It was apparent from a comparison of these results that the effect of the deodorant composition was enhanced following use o~ the NSD powder as compared with the 80/20/5 standard soap base bar, the former being effective from the fabric of a garment, and the latter being effective -from a soap bar applied directly to the slcin.
Example 2 In this example the effect O-e a deodorant composition ! incorpora-ted in a non-soap detergent (NSD) personal washing bar was evaluated by the Deodorant Value Test rel`erred -to above.

. ~19 _ 1., .

l~Z ~ 0~ C.1020 US

Personal washing bars for use as control bars and also as a basis for incorporation of the deodorant composition had the :formulation of Detergent Bar A as herein before described.
Te~t personal washiMg bars were prepare(l by -the addition of 1.5 parts of deodorant composition to 98.5 parts of the above formulation, The formulation of deodorant composition 2 was as follows:

- 50 - /~

llZZ90Z c. ~020 U~

I:)co(lor~lrl l; ~L~i.on 2 _ _ _ Co~ )o:nen~s Parts Class Total in clas~
Carvacrol 3.5 ) 4.5 Thy~e oil red 1.0 S ~ex~a~ot AB 37 20.0 2 Pollleransol AB 413 6.0 2 ~ 30.0 Pe-titgrain oil g.O 2 6~Ace-tyl-1,1,3,~,4,6-hexa-methyl-tetrahydro-naphthalene 3.0 3 ~ 8 0 /3-Methyl na-phthyl ketoneS.O 3 3a-Methyl-dodecallydro-6,6,9a-trimethyl naphtho-2(2,1-b) *
furan 0.25 (9) /3-Naphthol ~ethyl e-ther9.0 9 9.0 lS In~rcdicnts Citronellyl acetate . 5.0 ~iprouylene ~lycol . g.75 .
Geranyl nitrile 1.5 Indole 1.0 ~0 Le~on~ra~ oil 3.0 Li~e AB 402 10.0 Lavendin oil 4.0 l-Menthol 8.0 Neroli A~ 78 6.0 Orange oil ~weet 5.0 100.0 eliminated ~ro~ calculation - belo~ thre~holcl value o~ 0.5~' _ 51._ /~

~zs~
~.1020 US

Total amount of components 51.5 Number ol components pre~en-t 8 Average amoun-t of each component 6.9 Nu~ber o~ cla~es represente(l Results of Deodorant Value Test 2 usin~ N~D bar Control bar Test bar Average scores 3.10 2.10 Odour Reduction Value 1.00 By way o~ comparison, the Deodorant Value o~
Deodorant Compo~ition 2 wa~ al~o determined in -the ~tandard 80/20/5 soap baRe as described in the Deodorant Value Test.
Re~ult~ of Deodorant Value T_~st 2 u~in~ 80/20/5 ~oap bas _bar Control bar Test bar Average scores 3.34 2.73 Deodorall-t value 0.61 It was apparent from a comparison of these results that the e~ect ol the deodorant composition was enhanced in the NSD bar as compared wi-th the 80/20/5 ~tandard soap ba~e bar.
Example 3 In this example the combined ef~ect o~ a deodorant composition and -the germicide, 2,4,~'-trichloro-2'-hydroxy-diphenylether, together incorpo.rated in a non-soap detergent (NSD) personal washing bar prepared as described in Example 2 was evaluated by the Deodorant Value Tes-t.

B

~ C.1020 US

Te~t personal washi.n~ bars were prepared by the addition of 1.5 parts of deodorant composition 3 and 0.25 part~ of 2,~ trichloro-2'-hydroxydiphenyle-ther to 97.75 parts o-f the dete:rgen-t base -for~]ula-tion re:rerred to in ~xample 2.
The formulation of deodorant composition 3 was as fo~.low~:

- 5~ -, ~l~Z~()Z ~. 1020 U~

lolc~ O~O~ 3 Co~onent~ Parts Class To tal in class ~ousse de chene Yugo 1.25 11 ~
Pi~leiito lea~ o:il 10.0 S ~enzoin Sia~ resinoids5 0 2 3 Berga~ot AB 430 15.0 2 ~ ~5.0 Geraniu~ oil 5.0 2 p--t-A~ylcyclohexanone 5.0 3 3 17.0 ~-iso-~ethyl ionone 12.0 3 Cou~arin 4.0 9 1,3,4,G,7,8-Hexahydro- ? 7.0 4,6,6,7,8,8-hexamethyl-cyclopenta-~-2-benzopyran3.0 9 Diethyl phthalate 9.35 5 9-35 ~n~rccli.crlt~
llercolyn ~ 12.25 Lavendin oil 10.0 Mu~lc a~rctte 3.0 ~osenta ~ 380 10.0 2~ ~lose-D-oxide 0.15 100.0 C.1020 US

To-tal amount o r component.~ 6~.G
Number of components presen-t 10 Average amount of each component 6.5 Number o~ cia~ses repre~en-ted 5 Results o-~ Deodorant Value Test 3 using NSD bar Control bar Te~t bar .. _ _ .. . . .
Average ~cores 3.lQ 2.16 Odour Reduction Value 0.99 By way o~ comparison, the Deodorant Value of the Deodorant Composition 3 was also determined in the standard 80/20/S soap base as described in the Deodorant Yalue Test.
Resul~ts o~ Deodorant Value Test 3 usin~ 80/20/5 soap base bar Control bar Te~t bar Average score~ 3.09 2.97 .
Deodorant value 0-57 Again, it was apparent from a comparisoll ol these re~ults that the efiect of the deodorant composition was enhanced in the NSD bar as comparec~ with the 80/20/5 standard ~oap ba~e bar.
Example 9 The procedure de~cribed in Example 1 was repeated using NSD Fabric ~a~hing Powder B a~ hereinbefore de~cribed in~tead of Fabric Wa~hing Powder C and u~ing a dif-ferent deodorant compo~ition.
2S The formulation of deodorant compo~ition 9 wa~ a~
rOllOws:

ll~Z90Z C.1020 US

l)eo(lo~ olll~ tiorl ~
ComT)onellts Parts Cla~s To-tal in class ~thyl vanillill 0.?.(1) :i~o-r~ oerlol 5.01 ~ G.?5 LRG 201 1.25 Bergamot AB 430 8.0 2 ~ 15.0 Patchouli oil 7.0 2 2-n-~e~-tylcyclopentanone 0.5 3 ~-iso-Methyl ionone 5.0 3 ~-Naphthol methylether 7.5 g 7.5 -t-Butylcyclohexyl acetate g.3 5 Diethyl phthalate 8.25 5 i-Nonyl formate 5,0 5 ~ 26.55 Nonanediol-1,3-diace-tate 9.0 5 Phenylethyl phenyl acetate 5.0 5 Tetrahydro ~u~uol 6.0 6 6.0 In~redi ell ts -Citrone].la oil 6.0 Green Herbal AB 502 15.0 Indole 1.5 Rosenta AB 380 6~0 Sandalone 4.0 ~-Undecalactone 0.5 100.0 2S elil~inated ~rom calculation - below threshold value ol 0. 5%

_ 5~

- 57 - C.1020 ~P

Total amount of components 66.8 Number of components present 14 Average amount of each component 4.8 Number of classes represented 6 Results of Deodorant Value Test 4 using NSD Powder Control Powder Test Powder Average scores 2.69 1.62 Odour reduction value 1.07 By way of comparison, the Deodorant Value of the Deodorant Composition 4 was also determined in the standard 80/20/5 soap base as described in the Deodorant Value Test.

Results of Deodorant Value Test 4 using 80/20/5 soap base bar Control bar Test bar Average scores 3.25 2.10 Deodorant value 1.15 Example 5 In this example, the effect of a deodorant composit.ion incorporated in a non-soap detergent ~NSD) shower gel was evaluated by the Deodorant Value Test referred to hereinbefore in relation to a soap bar.

The test procedure was however modified in the following manner : înstead of employing a standard soap bar, 4g of the shower gel were placed on a damp cloth, lathered by rubbing and then applied to the axilla for 15 B

oz - 57a - C.1020 EP

seconds. The cloth was then thoroughly rinsed and used to wipe the axilla. To ensure that removal of excess shower gel was effective, a second clean wet cloth was used for a further rinse of the axilla. The axilla was then dried.
The odour assessment scores obtained 5 hours later were expressed as odour reduction value.

~, .

~ Z C.1020 US

The formulation of the shower gel was -the de~cribed hereinbefore as Shower Gel B.
Test shower gel was prepared by addition of 1.5 part~
of a deodoran-t Colllposi.tiorl -to 9S. 5 t)arts ol tlle above formulation.
The formulation of deodorant composition 5 was as follows:

- 5~ -1~

~ ~ C'.1020 US

Oeo~lor~llt ~ol~ itiOIl 5 CompoIIerlt~ Part~ Clcl~s To-tal in cla s Ben~yl ~alicylate 15.0 Mou~e de chene Yugo 6.0 1 ~ 21.0 Berga~ot AB 430 15.0 2 15.0 6-Acetyl-1,3,3,4,4,6-hexa-methyl tetrahydronaphthalene 2.5 3 2.5 p-t-Amylcyclohexanone 0.06 (~) 3a-Methyl-dodecahydro-6,6,9a--trimethyl-naphtho-2(2,1-b) ~uran 0.75 4 0.75 Diethyl phthalate 8.04 5 8.04 Nonanolide-1,4 0.2 (5) Dimyrcetol 16.0 6 16.0 Ingredients Cinnamic alcohol 5.0 Dimethyl ben~yl carbinyl acetate 2.5 Dipropylene glycol 14.25 Geraniol 5.0 iso-Butyl phenyl acetate5.0 Methyl salicylate 0.5 Pelargene ~-Trichloromethyl phenyl carbinyl acetate 0.2 100 . O
eli~inated ~rom calculation - below threshold value ~or a co~ponent o~ 0. 5%

_ ~9 /

~2 .
W

~9~
C.1020 US

Total amoun-t of components 63.29 Nwuber ol` compollcnts present 7 Average amount Oe each component 9.0 Number o~ cla~ses represented 6 Results of Deodorant Value Test 5 usin~ NSD shower ~el Control ~el Test gel Average scores 2.9~ 1.62 Odour Reduction Value 1.35 By way of comparison, the Deodorant Value of the Deodorant Composition 5 was also determined using the standard 80/20/5 soap base as described in the Deodorant Value Test.
Results of Deodorant Value Test S usin~ 80/20¦5 soap base bar Control bar Test bar Avera~e scores 3.30 2.70 .
Deoclorant value 0.60 It was apparent from a comparison o~ these results tha-t the effect o e the deodorant composition was enhanced eollowing use of the NSD shower ~el as compared with the standard 80120/5 soap base.
Example 6 The procedure described in Example 5 was repeated using NSD Sho~er Gel C as herein~efore described instead O:e Shower Gel B and using a different deodorant composition.
The formulation of deodorant composition 6 was as' ~ollo-~s:

_ 60 -. `~ ' ~ ~ C.1020 U~

J)o(\('lo:l <ln 1; l~onlr~0~,itiorl 6 .. . . .
Co~lpor_ent~ Part~ Cla~ To-tal in cla~
Clove leaf oil 10.0 1 ~ 11.25 LnG 201 1.2S
l~etitgrain oil 10.0 2 10.0 p-t-Butyl-~-methyl hydro cinnamic aldehyde 15.0 3 15.1 3a-Methyl_dodecahydro-6,6,9a-trimethylnaphtho-2(2,1-b) furan 0.5 4 o.
o-t-Butylcyclohexyl acetate 2.0 5 Diethyl phthalate 9.25 5 21.25 i-Nonyl acetate 10.0 5 Phenyl ethyl alcohol 10.0 6 10.0 In~redient~
Benzyl propionate ~.0 Ber~a~lot oil 15.0 .
~imethyl benzyl carbinyl acetate 50 i~o-Butyl benzoate 5.0 Neroli oil 3.0 100.0 _ 61 -B

C.1020 US

Total amount o~ colTlponents 68.0 Numher of componen-ts present 9 Average amount of each component 7.6 Nu~ber o~' classes representecl 6 Results o-~ Deodorant Value Te~t 6 using NSD shower ~el _ . .
Control gel Test ~el Average scores 3~33 1.88 Odour Reduction Value 1.45 By way of comparison, the Deodorant Value of Deodorant Compositio~ 6 was also determined in the standard 80/20/5 soap bar as described in the Deodorant Value Test.
Results of Deodorant V_lue Test using 80~20/5 soap base bar Control bar Test bar Average scores 3.25 2.33 0.92 As w`ith Example 5, it was apparent that the e~ect oi' the deodorant composition was enhanced following use of the NSD s~lower gel as compared with the standard 80120/5 soap base.
Example 7 The procedure described in Example 1 was repeated using ~SD Fabric ~ashing Liquid C as hereinbefore described in~tead of Fabric llashing Powder C and using Deodorant Composition 3 a~
described in ~xample 3.

- 6~ - 1 B

~z~
C.1020 US

The results of Deodorant Value Tes-t 7 (using NSD liquid plus Deodorant Composition 3) were as ~ollows:
Control li~uid Tcst liquicl .~erage sco:res 2.G4 2.14 Odour Reduction Value O . 50 Example 8 The procedure described in Example 1 was repeated using N~D Fabric l~ashing Powder D as hereinbefore described instead o~ Fabric Washing Powder C and using Deodorant Co~position 2 as described in Example 2.
rrhe results ol Deodoran-t Value Test 8 (using NSD
powder plus Deodorant Composition 2) were as follows:
Control powder Test po~der ~verage scores 2.70 1.76 Odour Reduction Value 0.94 Example 9 r~he procedure described in ~xample 1 was repeated using NSD Fabric l~ashing Powder F as hereinbelore described instead ol Fabric Washing Powder C and using Deodorant Composition 3 as described in Example 3.
The results of Deodorant Value Tes-t 9 (using NSD po~der plus Deodorant Compositi.on 3) were as follows:
Control po~der r~es-t po~der ~verage scores 2.76 1.70 Odour Reduction Value 1.06 - 63 ~ /

i ~ C.1020 US

APP~NDIX
The followi.ng glossary provides ~urther in~ormation, including the suppliers' names, ~hich will aid identi~ication of some o~ the arorementioned deodorallt co~ onent~ & ingredient~.

Dimyrcetol - Dimyrcetol (IFF) Hercolyn D - Tetrahydro abietate +
dihydro abie-tate (HP) LI~G ~01 - Oak~o~s speciality (RB) Pelargene - Pelargene (PPL) Rose~D-Oxide - Rose oxide synthetic (PPL) Sandalone - Sandalone (PPL) I

Per-~un!e Houses II1' - Hercule~ Powder Co.
. IFF - . International Flavour &
Fragrance~ Inc. -R~ _ Roure Bertrand PPL - Proprietary Per~ume~ Limited All materials which are clas~ified by a name and number, such a~ those having the 'AB~ notation, are obtainable ~rom Proprietary Per~umes Limited.

_ 64 _ ***

. ~r ~ . .

Claims (9)

- 65 - C.1020 EP
The embodimènts of the invention in which an exclusive property or privilege is claimed are defined as follows:

1. A deodorant detergent product comprising:

(i) from 0.5 to 99.99% by weight of a non-soap detergent active compound chosen from non-soap anionic detergent active compounds, nonionic detergent active compounds, cationic detergent active compounds, amphoteric detergent active compounds, zwitterionic detergent active compounds, and mixtures thereof, the nonionic detergent active compounds being chosen from condensates of the reaction product of ethylenediamine and propylene oxide with ethylene oxide, the condensates containing from 40 to 80% of polyoxyethylene radicals by weight and having a molecular weight of from 5,000 to 11,000; tertiary amine oxides of structure R3NO, where one group R is an alkyl group of 8 to 18 carbon atoms and the others are each methyl, ethyl or hydroxyethyl groups; tertiary phosphine oxides of structure R3PO, where one group R is an alkyl group of 10 to 18 carbon atoms, and the others are each alkyl or hydroxyalkyl groups of 1 to 3 carbon atoms; and dialkyl sulphoxides of structure R2SO where one group R
is an alkyl group of from 10 to 18 carbon atoms and the other is methyl or ethyl;

(ii) from 0.01 to 10% by weight of a deodorant composition having a Deodorant Value of from 0.50 to 3.5, and comprising from 45 to 100% by weight of deodorant components, said components having a lipoxidase-inhibiting capacity of at least 50% or a Raoult variance ratio of at least 1.1, said components being classified into six classes consisting of:

K2ZlOW

- 66 - C.1020 EP

Class 1 : phenolic substances Class 2 : essential oils, extracts, resins and synthetic oils Class 3 : aldehydes and ketones Class 4 : polycyclic compounds Class 5 : esters Class 6 : alcohols, provided that where a component can be classified into more than one class, it is placed in the lower or lowest numbered class;
said components being so selected that (a) the deodorant composition contains at least five components of which at least one must be selected from each of class 1, class 2 and class 4;

(b) the deodorant composition contains components from at least 4 of the 6 classes; and (c) any component present in the deodorant composition at a concentration of less than 0.5% by weight of said composition is eliminated from the requirements of (a) and (b), the Deodorant Value being measured by the Deodorant Value Test which comprises the steps of (a) applying to the axillae of a panel of 50 Caucasian male subjects of age within the range of from 20 to 55 years (the subjects being chosen from those who develop axilliary body malodour that is not unusually strong and who do not develop a stronger body malodour in one axilla compared with the other), lather obtained from - 67 - C.1020 EP

either test or control soap bars, the test soap bar comprising standard soap essentially manufactured from tallow and coconut oil according to conventional soap making practice, together with added deodorant composition at a concentration of 1.5% by weight, and the control soap bars comprising standard soap without added deodorant composition, the application of either test or control soap being according to a statistically designed experiment;

(b) assessing the body malodour of the axillae of each subject, after a period of 5 hours, by close application, in succession, of the nose of each of three female assessors to each axilla who then record the intensity of odour on a 0 to 5 scale, 0 representing no odour and 5 representing very strong odour, the strength of the odour in each instance being related, for purposes of comparison, to standard odours produced by aqueous solutions of isovaleric acid at different concentrations according to the following table:

(c) calculating the average scores for both test soap and control soap, and substracting the average score for the control soap from the average score for the test soap to arrive at the Deodorant Value for the Deodorant composition in the test soap bar;

- 68 - C.1020 EP

the Lipoxidase Inhibiting Capacity of the components being a measure of their ability to inhibit the oxidation of linoleic acid by standard lipoxidase to form the corresponding hydroperoxide; and the Raoult Variance Ratio of the components being a measure of their ability to depress the partial vapour pressure of morpholine by an amount which is at least 10% more than that predicted by Raoult's Law.

2. A deodorant detergent product according to claim 1, in which the deodorant composition has a deodorant value of from 0.70 to 3.5 as measured by the Deodorant Value Test.

3. A deodorant detergent product according to claim 1, in which the deodorant composition has a deodorant value of from 1.20 to 3.5 as measured by the Deodorant Value Test.

4. A deodorant detergent product according to any of claims 1 to 3, further comprising a germicide or a zinc salt.

5. A deodorant detergent product according to any of claims 1 to 3, in which the amount of deodorant components present in the class comprising phenolic substances and the class comprising essential oils, extracts, resins and synthetic oils and the class comprising polycyclic compounds, is at least 1% by weight of the deodorant composition for each of the classes, and the amount of deodorant components present in the further class chosen from the remaining three classes is at least 1% by weight of the deodorant composition.

6. A deodorant detergent product according to any of claims 1 to 3, in which the average concentration of all C5EllS

- 69 - C.1020 such components present is at least 5% by weight where five or six of the classes is represented.

7. A deodorant detergent product according to any of claims 1 to 3, in which the amount of deodorant components present in the class comprising phenolic substances and the class comprising essential oils, extracts, resins and synthetic oils and the class comprising polycyclic compounds, is at least 3% by weight of the deodorant composition for each of the classes and the amount of deodorant components present in the further class chosen from the remaining three classes is at least 3% by weight of the deodorant composition.

8. A deodorant detergent product according to any of claims 1 to 3, in which at least five of the classes is represented.

9. A deodorant detergent product according to any of claims 1 to 3, in which all six classes are represented.